Mathews, Russell Gordon Haig v Anastasia Fardoulys Dental Pty Ltd & Anor [1995] FCA 968

Mathews, Russell Gordon Haig v Anastasia Fardoulys Dental Pty Ltd & Anor [1995] FCA 968

There was no valid basis for apprehension of bias as the judge's prior involvement did not go to the merits and Mr. Mathews was previously content to proceed before the judge in related matters. The claim against the second respondent was struck out as there was no evidence linking the second respondent to alleged unlawful conduct. Claims under ss. 49, 51AB, and 80 of the Trade Practices Act against the first respondent were also struck out due to lack of sufficient material. Claims under s. 53 and the associated damages claim were not doomed to fail and should be transferred to the District Court at Brisbane, along with the personal injury claim, as this was in the interests of justice...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application; Orders on Notice of Motion to Strike Out and to Transfer
Outcome
Application partially struck out, remaining proceedings transferred to District Court at Brisbane.
Legal Topics
['misleading Conduct' 'price Discrimination' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'professional Negligence' 'personal Injury' 'transfer of Proceedings' 'perceived Bias']
['trade Practices' 'torts' 'civil Procedure'] ['misleading Conduct' 'price Discrimination' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'professional Negligence' 'personal Injury' 'transfer of Proceedings' 'perceived Bias']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application; Orders on Notice of Motion to Strike Out and to Transfer

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the judge should disqualify himself for reasonable apprehension of bias' 'Whether the application against the second respondent should be struck out' 'Whether the application against the first respondent should be struck out in relation to certain sections of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)' 'Whether the remaining claims should be transferred to the District Court at Brisbane']

Ratio Decidendi

There was no valid basis for apprehension of bias as the judge's prior involvement did not go to the merits and Mr. Mathews was previously content to proceed before the judge in related matters. The claim against the second respondent was struck out as there was no evidence linking the second respondent to alleged unlawful conduct. Claims under ss. 49, 51AB, and 80 of the Trade Practices Act against the first respondent were also struck out due to lack of sufficient material. Claims under s. 53 and the associated damages claim were not doomed to fail and should be transferred to the District Court at Brisbane, along with the personal injury claim, as this was in the interests of justice...

Court Disposition

Application partially struck out, remaining proceedings transferred to District Court at Brisbane.

Orders

  • ["The applicant's application against the second respondent is struck out." "The applicant's application against the first respondent, in so far as it relies on ss. 49, 51AB and 80 the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), is struck out." "The applicant's application against the first respondent, in so far as it relies on...